On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 2:25:13 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 11:44:43 AM UTC-6, James Nicoll wrote:
> > In article <0qej9i1q10cdlj9q4...@4ax.com>,
> > Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
> > >But the real question is: since chemical weapons are weapons of mass
> > >destruction, will NATO react as it (presumably) would to a tactical
> > >nuke? Has Putin finally obtained what may be his goal -- war with
> > >NATO?
>
> > Given the lack of progress in Ukraine, not 100 percent sure total war
> > with NATO would progress entirely to Russia's benefit.
> I can agree with that sentiment, but I do not see it as an argument against
> the claim that war with NATO is Putin's goal. Instead, I would use the fact
> that Russian tanks haven't barreled into, say, Estonia as of yet as my argument
> that war with NATO is not Putin's immediate goal at this time. It may be his
> eventual goal, after he is more confident that he has established that NATO
> has a lack of resolve - _that_ is a position that I had initially agreed with.
>
> At present, though, given the level of unity in NATO's support for Ukraine, I
> would have thought that he has instead found that NATO _does_ have a
> sufficient level of resolve that any plans for war with NATO that he may have
> should be... shelved for the time being.

I'm pretty sure that at the moment, he still thinks the West will tire of supporting
Ukraine, especially if Trump is back in office in 2025.

He's been consistently trying to undermine Western society for over a decade,
getting Europe hooked on cheap Russian energy, promoting extremist political
groups of all kinds, using social media to push disinformation and social division.

No doubt the firm resistance up to now has given him pause, but the fact that a
hostile military group was able to get most the way to Moscow, virtually unopposed
has probably steeled his resolve to push Russia's borders outward.

pt

On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 3:34:59 PM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> I'm pretty sure that at the moment, he still thinks the West will tire of supporting
> Ukraine, especially if Trump is back in office in 2025.
>
> He's been consistently trying to undermine Western society for over a decade,
> getting Europe hooked on cheap Russian energy, promoting extremist political
> groups of all kinds, using social media to push disinformation and social division.
>
> No doubt the firm resistance up to now has given him pause, but the fact that a
> hostile military group was able to get most the way to Moscow, virtually unopposed
> has probably steeled his resolve to push Russia's borders outward.

This is a good analysis. And if one views this struggle as a race against time...

then, if Russia's time has become shorter, that is a reason for Russia to run harder.

And, if the Wagner rebellion has weakened Putin, what about the West? I'd say
that Trump's continued high level of support is nearly a mortal wound for the
West, because there seems to be a good chance that if either Trump or
De Santis gets in, the United States' days as a democracy - and as a republic -
are over.

John Savard

On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 11:32:36 AM UTC+10, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 3:34:59 PM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I'm pretty sure that at the moment, he still thinks the West will tire of supporting
> > Ukraine, especially if Trump is back in office in 2025.
> >
> > He's been consistently trying to undermine Western society for over a decade,
> > getting Europe hooked on cheap Russian energy, promoting extremist political
> > groups of all kinds, using social media to push disinformation and social division.
> >
> > No doubt the firm resistance up to now has given him pause, but the fact that a
> > hostile military group was able to get most the way to Moscow, virtually unopposed
> > has probably steeled his resolve to push Russia's borders outward.
> This is a good analysis. And if one views this struggle as a race against time...

Yes, the reasonable action on finding that
a) you're crap at projecting force beyond your borders
b) your defences suck inside your borders

Is to invade more places and make it more likely that people will attack you in response
That's brilliance...

Nobody wants to invade Russia
>
> then, if Russia's time has become shorter, that is a reason for Russia to run harder.

If Russia's time is becoming shorter it's only because they're running towards a cliff, running faster isn't going to help that.
>
> And, if the Wagner rebellion has weakened Putin, what about the West? I'd say
> that Trump's continued high level of support is nearly a mortal wound for the
> West,

Trump's getting a huge amount of support from the right, his support among independents and Democrats is historically low.

> because there seems to be a good chance that if either Trump or
> De Santis gets in, the United States' days as a democracy - and as a republic -
> are over.

De Santis seems like he's spluttering out massively even among the GOP
Trump will likely win the GOP primary but is likely to motivate a huge amount of people to turn out and vote against him in the actual election
Hard to see him winning in 2024 after the loss in 2022
and at 77 he still has to make it to the 2024 election and he's not in the best of health

On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 8:36:51 PM UTC-6, Hamish Laws wrote:

> Yes, the reasonable action on finding that
> a) you're crap at projecting force beyond your borders
> b) your defences suck inside your borders
>
> Is to invade more places and make it more likely that people will attack you in response
> That's brilliance...
>
> Nobody wants to invade Russia

Oh, you are definitely correct as well.

But we already _know_ that Putin doesn't want to just live in
peace and harmony with the rest of the world. And so, for
example, he _must_ have Crimea, so that the Russian navy
can project power in the Atlantic.

Russia has nuclear weapons. So it is 100% secure from
foreign invasion, foreign aggression, or regime change.
That is pretty much a given.

If Putin wanted to conquer Europe, as it seemed because
of how he was following the footsteps of Hitler, then
throwing all your military-age young men into a meatgrinder
obviously won't help. So I would have expected him to stick
to hitting Ukraine with missiles to make life miserable, and
otherwise to pretty much give up on the boots on the ground
thing after the initial push to Kyiv failed.

So, no, I don't think of Putin as a brilliant strategist. He didn't
even need to invade Crimea, Ukraine was willing to let him
use it despite the difference in politics - just as Turkey,
despite being in NATO, lets Russia use the strait to the
Mediterranean because of a treaty. It's a given that he is
a madman that can't stand to see any part of what was the
old Soviet Empire enjoying freedom.

So Poland, the Czech Republic, and so on, are dang lucky they
are safely within NATO. Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia even more
so.

John Savard

On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 11:18:47 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

>On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 10:28:58?AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
>
>> Or does he have enough sense to publicly remove the commander
>> responsible while apologizing for the violation of the Rules of War
>> (that is, the relevant treaties which Russia has signed)?
>
>I think he has just enough sense to publicly announce that the
>report you read was a complete lie and provocation by "Ukrainian
>Nazi" agents.
>
>This would serve the purpose of communicating that Russia does
>not have the official intention of using chemical weapons in Ukraine
>at this time, without admitting to any attempt to have done so.
>
>Admiting to any error, fault, or weakness is not within the ambit of
>Vladimir Putin's level of sense any more than it is within Donald J.
>Trump's.

I saw nothing about it yesterday.

It may, indeed, have been a result of hysteria.

At this point, who can say?
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

In article <avpg9itvlluhodeih7c0ubvltt815teocf@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 08:22:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
><rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>
>>On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 20:55:52 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>> >On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38?AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
>>> >
>>> >That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
>>> >is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we
>say... repair
>>> >work... on the roads to Moscow.
>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
>>> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
>>> equipment are trying to put the fire out.
>>
>>I was going to suggest that if this is what it takes
>>to get infrastructure repairs done, then they should try
>>it seriously in the U.S.A. Well, maybe not.
>>
>>Though previously - "In 1919, the U.S. Army sent an
>>expedition across the U.S. to determine the difficulties
>>that military vehicles would have on a cross-country trip."
>><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System>
>>
>>Answer: plenty of difficulties.
>
>An may well have led to the "United States Numbered Highway System"
>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highway_System],
>later replaced (as /Cars/ shows us) by the Interstate Highways.
>
>Then again, maybe not: Rte 66 and friends apparently started /before/
>1919. So perhaps it /was/ the Interstate Highways that were put into
>place starting in the 50's to help the Army move its troops and
>equipment around. Ike, after all, was a military man, and may have
>been aware of the problem.

(Hal Heydt)
Eisenhower observed at least part of 1919 trek. Plus he was
REALY big on logistics...so, yeah, that's why he pushed the
Interstate Highway system, complete with the spec that bridges
are supposed to have enough clearance for a tank on a
transporter.

In article <28caf2f8-ca91-4569-be6f-cb3b062ec4adn@googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>So Poland, the Czech Republic, and so on, are dang lucky they
>are safely within NATO. Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia even more
>so.

(Hal Heydt)
Don't forget the former Grand Duchy of Finland (though Russia
already has the Kerelia Peninsula).

On Monday, July 3, 2023 at 1:35:53 PM UTC-6, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <28caf2f8-ca91-4569...@googlegroups.com>,
> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >So Poland, the Czech Republic, and so on, are dang lucky they
> >are safely within NATO. Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia even more
> >so.

> (Hal Heydt)
> Don't forget the former Grand Duchy of Finland (though Russia
> already has the Kerelia Peninsula).

Finland avoided Warsaw Pact membership through neutrality, like
Austria. It is only making moves to join NATO at present.

Of course, the countries I listed _were_ Warsaw Pact members,
only joining NATO after the fall of the Soviet Union - they're lucky
_now_ to be in NATO, now that Putin has shown his true colors
to everyone in Ukraine.

He showed them to me in Georgia in 2008.

John Savard

On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-5, Hamish Laws wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 11:32:36 AM UTC+10, Quadibloc wrote:
> > On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 3:34:59 PM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > I'm pretty sure that at the moment, he still thinks the West will tire of supporting
> > > Ukraine, especially if Trump is back in office in 2025.
> > >
> > > He's been consistently trying to undermine Western society for over a decade,
> > > getting Europe hooked on cheap Russian energy, promoting extremist political
> > > groups of all kinds, using social media to push disinformation and social division.
> > >
> > > No doubt the firm resistance up to now has given him pause, but the fact that a
> > > hostile military group was able to get most the way to Moscow, virtually unopposed
> > > has probably steeled his resolve to push Russia's borders outward.
> > This is a good analysis. And if one views this struggle as a race against time...
> Yes, the reasonable action on finding that
> a) you're crap at projecting force beyond your borders
> b) your defences suck inside your borders
>
> Is to invade more places and make it more likely that people will attack you in response
> That's brilliance...
>
> Nobody wants to invade Russia
> >
> > then, if Russia's time has become shorter, that is a reason for Russia to run harder.
> If Russia's time is becoming shorter it's only because they're running towards a cliff, running faster isn't going to help that.
> >
> > And, if the Wagner rebellion has weakened Putin, what about the West? I'd say
> > that Trump's continued high level of support is nearly a mortal wound for the
> > West,
> Trump's getting a huge amount of support from the right, his support among independents and Democrats is historically low.
> > because there seems to be a good chance that if either Trump or
> > De Santis gets in, the United States' days as a democracy - and as a republic -
> > are over.
> De Santis seems like he's spluttering out massively even among the GOP

It's _way_ too soon to say anything useful about the election prospects (at least among the ones who have any chance at all).

In E2004, at roughly this stage in the electoral cycle, Howard Dean was seen as the soon-to-be Democratic nominee, with momentum and a movement behind him. He flamed out on day one of the actual primaries.

At this point in 2007, the pundits, reporters, and a lot of the public 'knew' that the 2008 election would of course be Rudy Giuliani vs. Hillary Clinton. It was almost taken for granted. Turned out be Obama vs. McCain.

At roughly this stage of the E2012 cycle, the 'smart money' at this stage was on Mitch Daniels being the GOP nominee. He self-destructed before the first primary. The 'smart money' would have said the likely backups were Chris Christie or Paul Ryan. Of course, none of the three were even _in_ the primaries when the time came, and Rick Santorum (who nobody was talking about at this point in that cycle) ended up being the most serious challenger to Romney.

And then of course in 2016, both parties were determined that _this_ time they were finally going to run their preferred candidates (i.e. Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton). No more nonsense. The GOP establishment failed spectacularly to stop Trump, and though the Dem establishment managed to force Hillary on their base (after failing in 2008), she faced a serious challenge from Bernie. But at the equivalent point in the election cycle, the pundits were talking about the Inevitable Jeb and the coming Clinton restoration.

It's easy to get sucked into the 'daily soap opera' of the media, as Limbaugh used to call it, but it's a waste of time eight months out from the primaries.

On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 11:27:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>On 6/25/2023 9:25 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 08:22:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
>> <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 20:55:52 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>>> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38?AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
>>>>>
>>>>> That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
>>>>> is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
>>>>> work... on the roads to Moscow.
>>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>>> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
>>>> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
>>>> equipment are trying to put the fire out.
>>>
>>> I was going to suggest that if this is what it takes
>>> to get infrastructure repairs done, then they should try
>>> it seriously in the U.S.A. Well, maybe not.
>>>
>>> Though previously - "In 1919, the U.S. Army sent an
>>> expedition across the U.S. to determine the difficulties
>>> that military vehicles would have on a cross-country trip."
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System>
>>>
>>> Answer: plenty of difficulties.
>>
>> An may well have led to the "United States Numbered Highway System"
>> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highway_System],
>> later replaced (as /Cars/ shows us) by the Interstate Highways.
>>
>> Then again, maybe not: Rte 66 and friends apparently started /before/
>> 1919. So perhaps it /was/ the Interstate Highways that were put into
>> place starting in the 50's to help the Army move its troops and
>> equipment around. Ike, after all, was a military man, and may have
>> been aware of the problem.
>
>Ike was one of the officers on that 1919 expedition.

Indeed he was - in fact that expedition was one of the chief things
that determined the powers that be in the Pentagon that Ike was
destined for much higher things.

Much later in 1944-45 Ike viewed the German Reichbahns and decided
that there were lots of ideas there that he could steal for the
benefit of the United States - which morphed into the Interstate
Highway System which was started under Ike and completed under LBJ and
RMN.

On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 18:47:29 +0000, Ivan Shmakov
<ivan@siamics.netNOSPAM.invalid> wrote:

> > One wonders if Russian nukes are any better maintained than their
> > trucks.
>
> That thought crossed my mind while pondering on why this
> 'special military operation' was started when it was.
>
> More specifically, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the
> Soviet-made warheads are nearing their expiration date, while
> the industrial capacity to produce new ones no longer exists.
>
While you may well be right would YOU be the president or other senior
official to roll the dice on the assumption you were right on that
point? That's a 'what-if' Putin & Co. are certain the West is NOT
willing to risk all on whether or not that's correct.

On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 9:54:51 PM UTC-4, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 18:47:29 +0000, Ivan Shmakov
> <iv...@siamics.netNOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > One wonders if Russian nukes are any better maintained than their
> > > trucks.
> >
> > That thought crossed my mind while pondering on why this
> > 'special military operation' was started when it was.
> >
> > More specifically, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the
> > Soviet-made warheads are nearing their expiration date, while
> > the industrial capacity to produce new ones no longer exists.
> >
> While you may well be right would YOU be the president or other senior
> official to roll the dice on the assumption you were right on that
> point? That's a 'what-if' Putin & Co. are certain the West is NOT
> willing to risk all on whether or not that's correct.

Russia is still capable of running a space program. I don't doubt that
they could maintain and replace nuclear weapons.

They don't need them all to work.

pt

On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 18:52:36 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:

>On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 11:27:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
><dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>>On 6/25/2023 9:25 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>> On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 08:22:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
>>> <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 20:55:52 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>>>> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38?AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
>>>>>> is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
>>>>>> work... on the roads to Moscow.
>>>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>>>> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
>>>>> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
>>>>> equipment are trying to put the fire out.
>>>>
>>>> I was going to suggest that if this is what it takes
>>>> to get infrastructure repairs done, then they should try
>>>> it seriously in the U.S.A. Well, maybe not.
>>>>
>>>> Though previously - "In 1919, the U.S. Army sent an
>>>> expedition across the U.S. to determine the difficulties
>>>> that military vehicles would have on a cross-country trip."
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System>
>>>>
>>>> Answer: plenty of difficulties.
>>>
>>> An may well have led to the "United States Numbered Highway System"
>>> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highway_System],
>>> later replaced (as /Cars/ shows us) by the Interstate Highways.
>>>
>>> Then again, maybe not: Rte 66 and friends apparently started /before/
>>> 1919. So perhaps it /was/ the Interstate Highways that were put into
>>> place starting in the 50's to help the Army move its troops and
>>> equipment around. Ike, after all, was a military man, and may have
>>> been aware of the problem.
>>
>>Ike was one of the officers on that 1919 expedition.
>
>Indeed he was - in fact that expedition was one of the chief things
>that determined the powers that be in the Pentagon that Ike was
>destined for much higher things.
>
>Much later in 1944-45 Ike viewed the German Reichbahns and decided
>that there were lots of ideas there that he could steal for the
>benefit of the United States - which morphed into the Interstate
>Highway System which was started under Ike and completed under LBJ and
>RMN.

Huh ... and I thought Clinton was President when I-90 was (finally)
completed in 1993 ... and the Shrub when its eastern extension opened
in 2003.

A lot of it was done, of course, by the time of RMN. Just not all of
it. And that's counting only the 2-digit routes.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On 2023-07-18, Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 18:52:36 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 11:27:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
>><dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On 6/25/2023 9:25 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 08:22:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
>>>> <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 20:55:52 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>>>>> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38?AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
>>>>>>> is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
>>>>>>> work... on the roads to Moscow.
>>>>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>>>>> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
>>>>>> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
>>>>>> equipment are trying to put the fire out.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was going to suggest that if this is what it takes
>>>>> to get infrastructure repairs done, then they should try
>>>>> it seriously in the U.S.A. Well, maybe not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Though previously - "In 1919, the U.S. Army sent an
>>>>> expedition across the U.S. to determine the difficulties
>>>>> that military vehicles would have on a cross-country trip."
>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System>
>>>>>
>>>>> Answer: plenty of difficulties.
>>>>
>>>> An may well have led to the "United States Numbered Highway System"
>>>> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highway_System],
>>>> later replaced (as /Cars/ shows us) by the Interstate Highways.
>>>>
>>>> Then again, maybe not: Rte 66 and friends apparently started /before/
>>>> 1919. So perhaps it /was/ the Interstate Highways that were put into
>>>> place starting in the 50's to help the Army move its troops and
>>>> equipment around. Ike, after all, was a military man, and may have
>>>> been aware of the problem.
>>>
>>>Ike was one of the officers on that 1919 expedition.
>>
>>Indeed he was - in fact that expedition was one of the chief things
>>that determined the powers that be in the Pentagon that Ike was
>>destined for much higher things.
>>
>>Much later in 1944-45 Ike viewed the German Reichbahns and decided
>>that there were lots of ideas there that he could steal for the
>>benefit of the United States - which morphed into the Interstate
>>Highway System which was started under Ike and completed under LBJ and
>>RMN.
>
> Huh ... and I thought Clinton was President when I-90 was (finally)
> completed in 1993 ... and the Shrub when its eastern extension opened
> in 2003.
>
> A lot of it was done, of course, by the time of RMN. Just not all of
> it. And that's counting only the 2-digit routes.

Indeed. I-99, for instance, didn't exist as an interstate at all 25
years ago, and still is in disjoint pieces with initial completion not
expected for many years.

Chris

On 7/9/2023 11:27 PM, Johnny1A wrote:
> On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-5, Hamish Laws wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 11:32:36 AM UTC+10, Quadibloc wrote:
>>> On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 3:34:59 PM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm pretty sure that at the moment, he still thinks the West will tire of supporting
>>>> Ukraine, especially if Trump is back in office in 2025.
>>>>
>>>> He's been consistently trying to undermine Western society for over a decade,
>>>> getting Europe hooked on cheap Russian energy, promoting extremist political
>>>> groups of all kinds, using social media to push disinformation and social division.
>>>>
>>>> No doubt the firm resistance up to now has given him pause, but the fact that a
>>>> hostile military group was able to get most the way to Moscow, virtually unopposed
>>>> has probably steeled his resolve to push Russia's borders outward.
>>> This is a good analysis. And if one views this struggle as a race against time...
>> Yes, the reasonable action on finding that
>> a) you're crap at projecting force beyond your borders
>> b) your defences suck inside your borders
>>
>> Is to invade more places and make it more likely that people will attack you in response
>> That's brilliance...
>>
>> Nobody wants to invade Russia
>>>
>>> then, if Russia's time has become shorter, that is a reason for Russia to run harder.
>> If Russia's time is becoming shorter it's only because they're running towards a cliff, running faster isn't going to help that.
>>>
>>> And, if the Wagner rebellion has weakened Putin, what about the West? I'd say
>>> that Trump's continued high level of support is nearly a mortal wound for the
>>> West,
>> Trump's getting a huge amount of support from the right, his support among independents and Democrats is historically low.
>>> because there seems to be a good chance that if either Trump or
>>> De Santis gets in, the United States' days as a democracy - and as a republic -
>>> are over.
>> De Santis seems like he's spluttering out massively even among the GOP
>
> It's _way_ too soon to say anything useful about the election prospects (at least among the ones who have any chance at all).
>
> In E2004, at roughly this stage in the electoral cycle, Howard Dean was seen as the soon-to-be Democratic nominee, with momentum and a movement behind him. He flamed out on day one of the actual primaries.
>
> At this point in 2007, the pundits, reporters, and a lot of the public 'knew' that the 2008 election would of course be Rudy Giuliani vs. Hillary Clinton. It was almost taken for granted. Turned out be Obama vs. McCain.
>
> At roughly this stage of the E2012 cycle, the 'smart money' at this stage was on Mitch Daniels being the GOP nominee. He self-destructed before the first primary. The 'smart money' would have said the likely backups were Chris Christie or Paul Ryan. Of course, none of the three were even _in_ the primaries when the time came, and Rick Santorum (who nobody was talking about at this point in that cycle) ended up being the most serious challenger to Romney.
>
> And then of course in 2016, both parties were determined that _this_ time they were finally going to run their preferred candidates (i.e. Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton). No more nonsense. The GOP establishment failed spectacularly to stop Trump, and though the Dem establishment managed to force Hillary on their base (after failing in 2008), she faced a serious challenge from Bernie. But at the equivalent point in the election cycle, the pundits were talking about the Inevitable Jeb and the coming Clinton restoration.
>
> It's easy to get sucked into the 'daily soap opera' of the media, as Limbaugh used to call it, but it's a waste of time eight months out from the primaries.

I miss Rush. I only listened 15 or 20 minutes a day but, that was good.

Lynn

On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 09:35:39 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>Huh ... and I thought Clinton was President when I-90 was (finally)
>completed in 1993 ... and the Shrub when its eastern extension opened
>in 2003.
>
>A lot of it was done, of course, by the time of RMN. Just not all of
>it. And that's counting only the 2-digit routes.

I-5 was definitely completely done well before the days of Slick
Willie.

On Thu, 20 Jul 2023 14:52:24 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:

>On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 09:35:39 -0700, Paul S Person
><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Huh ... and I thought Clinton was President when I-90 was (finally)
>>completed in 1993 ... and the Shrub when its eastern extension opened
>>in 2003.
>>
>>A lot of it was done, of course, by the time of RMN. Just not all of
>>it. And that's counting only the 2-digit routes.
>
>I-5 was definitely completely done well before the days of Slick
>Willie.

Indeed it was.

Sadly, the statement I was responding to was:

>>>Much later in 1944-45 Ike viewed the German Reichbahns and decided
>>>that there were lots of ideas there that he could steal for the
>>>benefit of the United States - which morphed into the Interstate
>>>Highway System which was started under Ike and completed under LBJ and
>>>RMN.

And even I-5 doesn't meet /that/ criterion: it was completed in 1979
(Carter).

And that's the point: completion of the IHS did /not/ occur under LBJ
and RMN, but took rather longer. Depending, of course, on the specific
route. And restricting the claim to the original roads (there is a new
one, I-99, still being built) and the 2-digit routes only.

Note that I-99 was required by a law passed by Congress -- that is, it
is pure pork, not only not part of the original plan but not part of
any plan at all.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"